Is your Computer holding up Your Job Search

If Bill Gates ever builds an airplane; my flying days are over!


I recently asked a displaced executive to provide an aerial depiction of what a typical day in his job search looked like. His response was as follows.


 I Fired up my computer at approximately 8:00 AM,  got sucked into myheadlines.com, checked the sport scores, screwed around on facebook.com, checked the weather forecast for the next 7 days, checked my e-mail (bad move!)

 I'd received an e-mail from a headhunter who required that I fill out the attached form. I enthusiastically acquiesced and diligently drilled down on the 12-page document. As I completed page 11 (approximately 50 minutes later,) the all too well-known (since my purchase of Windows Vista) iconic circle of death began to toil and spin round and round. At that moment, I woefully realized that the image that is forever indelibly embedded in my brain had once again invaded, corrupted, and undermined my daily job search... I am not sure why Gates replaced the hour glass with a circle; it must have something to do with circling the drain...

Meanwhile, I realized that I had five new text messages and four new voice mails on my "Hell phone"; mostly solicitations and calls from mom, wife, and friends (God bless them, but...)

I had forgotten to plug cell into the charger the previous night... No worries; I could use the landline for the 9:30 interview with the CEO of companyofmydreams.com... Oh crap! I just realized that I would be in my car at 9:30; I had promised my son that I would drop him off at the library, as his laptop was down and he had been using their computer...

Takeaway; If your earning potential is $200,000 annually, you are paying yourself approximately $100 per hour to engross manually in an Internet-based job search... Why not pay and admin assistant $12 per hour and just go golf or something... You are more likely to find a job at the club house!

12:00 PM... visited the usual job boards: blackhole.com, intotheabyss.net, careerwrecker.org, resumeeater.net, and youwillneverfindajobhere.crap.com. I applied for four jobs in just under four hours (racing thoughts to self: got to stop checking e-mail when I'm trying to do this; damn cell phone won't stop ringing; need a faster computer...).

The requirements for the jobs that I spent four hours applying for on this particular day were exceptionally vague. They all stated that they needed leaders with a track record, executives with vision, and senior professionals with care and a cause for their subordinates... Damn, I got that; although, I have never worked in green energy science; the ad doesn't say anything about that! I was sure that when they saw my resume ranked amongst the other 350 executives with a green energy background, it would be apparent that I should be their top choice... Maybe I should send two resumes, or maybe I could put something in the e-mail subject line that would get their attention; something like HIRE ME... Yes, that would surely make up for the fact that I have only worked in insurance for 27 years. I am most certainly their best choice...

4 PM... thought I should follow up on the 10 resumes I had sent 2 weeks ago... But somehow, I convinced myself that I should probably cut the lawn again (third time this week)... I was sure that if I waited long enough, they would come to their senses and call me... Somebody at a networking meeting said that I should reach out to everybody I know to be sure that they are aware of my search for new employment. My problem with that was... I didn't know anybody! One guy even suggested that I contact my attorney about my job search, and even my accountant. He further suggested that I let the people I used to work with know that I was seeking new employment... This all seemed like a huge waste of time; these people wouldn't have a job for me, and I was sure they didn't know anybody either...

This guy could have gone on for hours about all that he was doing to absolutely sabotage his job search. But even worse, he was discrediting his personal brand and cheapening his net market value, executive demeanor, and professional profile. Worst of all, he thought he was doing all the right things to find a 200k job!

Five rules to maximize technology's effectiveness in your executive career search

1. Do not apply to posted jobs online between the hours of 8 AM and 5 PM. These are prime business hours to be used for follow up phone calls, networking, and interviewing... When you do use the Internet for a job search, employ a site or sites akin to indeed.com that simultaneously search multiple sites for you. Furthermore, do not allocate this valuable time to researching companies on the Web, etc....

I have concluded that the only truly valid reason to gaze wearily at job boards is to intermittently and temporarily keep your hope alive while you are laying the foundation for the revival of your network. Moreover, utilizing Internet job boards must not be considered a proactive search activity... Confusing it as such will lengthen your search by months or longer.

Job boards are a delusion, and chasing them is like chasing after the wind... It may be many months before you reach the oasis, only to find that it's a mirage, and it's now too late to turn back and start networking! To be precise, every man, woman, and child on the face of this planet who might recognize your name needs to know today that you are job hunting... This includes your butcher, baker, and candlestick maker!


Takeaway; IF IT DOESN'T FEEL RIGHT, DO IT!

2. Set up a separate e-mail address for all of your job search activities and don't check personal e-mail between 8 AM and 5 PM... Just as you wouldn't check personal e-mail when you were running your corporate business during normal business hours... E-mailing, tweeting, and facebooking will suck the life out of your search campaign...

3. If you believe that your job search is a business, you should have a separate phone number for your search activity... When you were running your business in corporate, did you use your home phone? Use your new business line, which, of course, is a landline, for important follow-up calls and interviews.

4. Make all follow-up calls between the hours of 7 AM and 11 AM and 2 PM and 6 PM... This will sometimes help you avoid *jail mail during lunch hours... Use a landline-one with a cord, not a remote handset with a battery that will die in the middle of a salary negotiation.

5. Use the Internet as a means of aggressively promoting your personal brand. One of the most awesome and powerful utilities offered by the Internet is the power to endorse your personal brand. Be sure that every e-mail address you have stored in your e-address book and/or elsewhere has been notified of your newfound mission for next generation employment. Do not send a resume, just a very short "hey, how ya doing?" letter; I call this "pinging." Also, if you do not have a LinkedIn account, create one. Ping the heaven out of your LinkedIn connections too!

Should You Ask for The Job?

Should You Ask for The Job?   

BROWNING ASSOCIATES 

Rather than ask for the job, I suggest you demonstrate interest by asking how the interview process will proceed and how you might remain part of it. In other words, as a savvy employment candidate you should be intuitive enough to know if the interview went well. If so, ask for a follow up commitment.

Ask for a follow up date; if it feels right, put the date and time in your calendar right there and then. If corporate protocol dictates your deferral to HR; on your way out of the interview stop at HR and ask for a follow up commitment, time and date.

Let's not read too much in to this. An interview is simply a meeting between two pros with a common cause. Common is the key!

Therefore, use the same keen common sense that got you where you are today to get you where you want to be tomorrow!

If you are applying for a sales position; remember what Zig Ziglar used to say; telling aintselling asking is! For you engineers and IT folk, come out of the comfort zone just enough to ask for a follow up commitment. As you should already know, once you leave the first interview, they will soon forget you! Make sure they don't!

Three Tips To Turn Indifferent Employees Into Top Producers

By Raquel Baldelomar 

Technology has completely changed how business is done. Today, more and more people can (and want to) do their job remotely with flexible work hours. This means there are fewer face-to-face interactions with colleagues and executives, because staff members can email, text and videoconference meetings. In addition, people want a job that fits their lifestyle, has meaning, offers development opportunities and allows them to use their talents. If you haven’t already started adapting your management structure to reengage staff members, the time to start is now. Here are three tips to help leaders develop a management philosophy that fits the new workplace dynamic.

1. Embrace flexible work schedules. The number of employees who are working remotely increased by four percentage points, bringing it to 43%, according to the report. Not only do employees want to be able to work from home or a Starbucks, some also want to work different hours than the typical 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. schedule. The bottom line is employees want more control about how and when they work. In fact, 51% of employees would change jobs for a position that offers more flexible time , the report found.

Leaders should be open to flexible work options for staff members. Have employees block out time on their calendar so the entire staff know when they are available to take phone calls, accept meetings or answer email. You can also require staff members to work a certain number of hours during your normal business office hours or even come into the office one day per week. It’s still important for staff to interact, communicate with each other and work together on common goals. That camaraderie will help improve employee engagement.

2. Reimagine how you evaluate employees’ performance. The dreaded annual employee performance review appears to be on its way out and an increasing number of business leaders, HR professionals and employees are happy to see it go. Only 21% of workers “strongly agreed that their performance is managed in a way that motivates them to do outstanding work,”  according to the report.

So what can leaders do better? Give feedback more frequently . One of the biggest flaws with the annual performance review is that many managers treat it as something to check off their list every year instead of a tool to use throughout the year to help manage their employees. Perhaps that is why companies like Accenture, Deloitte, General Electric, IBM, The Gap, Adobe and Microsoft are all revamping their performance management systems—and some of them are completely ditching the annual review.

Leaders can either evaluate the annual performance review process and improve it or scrap it and build a process that suits their needs. Regardless of which option you choose, employees want very specific items included in the process, according to the study. American workers want a very detailed and clear job description. They also want a voice when it comes to choosing goals and they want to understand how those goals fit into the big picture of the organization. Lastly, performance conversations should be handled in a manner that makes staff members feel supported not judged throughout the process.

Raquel Baldelomar is the founder and president of Quaintise, coauthor of the book Sugar Crush and can be found on Facebook at facebook.com/raquel.baldelomar

3 Reasons Why Your Network Contact is Not Calling You Back!

3 Reasons Why Your Network Contact is Not Calling You Back!

 BROWNING ASSOCIATES 

3 Reasons Why Your Network Contact is Not Calling You Back!

You're speaking with another executive in your network or recruiter whom has promised to circulate your resume throughout his network. He even goes as far as to say he knows of a vacant position that you would be perfect for...He promises to touch base with his contacts and be back with you in short order! Two weeks have since passed, and your ol friend has vanished! You've left a few messages, but at this point you might be wondering if he's still breathing. Just a week ago he was fervently excited to help, and now; MIA! How could this be?????

Here's What Went Wrong

   

Mistake Number 1. No Quid Pro Qou!

You did not take the time to understand what his needs are...Did you ask him how things are going in his career? Has he thought about something bigger and better for himself? Did you suggest a few people that you might refer him to? If you are part of The Browning Associates network, you could have said, "I know of a huge network in your industry and I'm glad to connect you with some excellent high level contacts...Either way, if you spoke for 10 minutes, 8 of those minutes should have been about your network contacts and what you can do to help him... BROWNING ASSOCIATES  knows Every 200k executive on the planet is always looking for something bigger; make it about them; no excuses, no exceptions! You will use your remaining 2 minutes to ask that they do the same for you...Consequently, the (Quid pro qou) has been birthed in to action!

Mistake Number 2. No Accountability No Call to Action!

Before you finish your conversation, there are two things that must happen. 1. Make it very clear what you are going to do for your networking contact and 2. Schedule a time for follow up. As far as they can see, you are scheduling a follow up call so as to be sure you are able to come back to them with the promised referrals etc... Remember; never give them all you've got until they come forth with their promise as well...Always keep them wanting more!   

Mistake Number 3. You appear Needy or as if you're selling something!

Remember who you are! You are a solution provider! If people do not see value in connecting with you or clearly are not respecting your time, move on! Of course we always remain professionally aggressive, but we never come across as if we are needy or selling... When I speak with somebody in our network on your behalf, I say it like this: "My guy/gal is a busy senior executive...Upon my review of your resume and background, it would be in your best interest to get to know this lady/gent asap...H/she will land a new role soon, at which point the window of opportunity to get to Him/er will slam shut! Your call...Let me know... Just like that; no more no less...You should promote yourself exactly the same way...People want what they cant have...

"  BROWNING ASSOCIATES looks forward to assisting you with reaching all of your career goals! "

10 Signs You're A Terrible Leader

10 Signs You're A Terrible Leader   Everyone has a learning curve when taking on a new leadership position. Being the head honcho isn't easy, and the leadership skills required to do the job aren't always innate—it can take time to grow into the role. Unfortunately, there are times when a manager or a boss is simply a bad leader. Maybe they had bad mentors, or they've picked up contradictory habits. Maybe they haven't had the necessary experience to understand their vital role and how best to accomplish it. Whatever the case, recognizing that your leadership skills need some serious work is the first step toward making changes and improving. Here are 10 signs that you're probably a terrible leader, as well as some steps you can begin taking to fix them. 1. You lack empathy: Caring for others and showing compassion toward employees only makes you weak, right? Wrong! Newsflash: No matter how high up the ranks you climb, you will always be human, and so will everyone else around you. Great leaders understand the importance of empathy. Don't be afraid to show your softer side. Have a sense of humor and show warmth to those around you. Practice relating to others and try to see situations from someone else's perspective. When you take time to recognize others, those around you will feel appreciated. Starting to think you might be guilty of being a terrible leader? Click here for 9 more signs.

Where Did the Job Search Process Get Broken

When did the job search process get broken? Years ago, getting a new job was a straightforward process.

• You typed up your resume and took it to a print shop.
• The print shop gave you back 50 or 100 copies of your resume.
• You read job ads in the newspaper and replied to them.
• You heard back from a few of the employers you had written to.
• You had one, two or maybe three job interviews at most for any given role.
• You got a job offer.
• You got hired.

That was it! Now the job-search process is excruciating. More automation has made things worse, not better. On top of that, the people you deal with as a job-seeker looking for a new role are often rude, brusque and condescending. Why is the job-search process so arduous and so hard on your self-esteem?

Here are five reasons for the deterioration of the job search experience, and the recruiting process in general.

The Advent of Applicant Tracking Systems

Applicant tracking systems started showing up in corporate and institutional recruiting programs in the early nineteen-nineties. They are a pox -- undoubtedly the worst application of technology ever employed to solve a human problem.

Two seconds of thought would tell us that you can't hire great people by spotting keywords in their resumes, but that hasn't stopped employers from jumping on the Applicant Tracking System bandwagon. Who knows how many fantastic job-seekers they've turned away with their talent-repelling recruiting processes?

Smart employers are starting to see the flaws in the automated recruiting framework and making their hiring practices more human bit by bit. It's high time they did!

The Reliance on Mechanical Communication

In case sitting at your computer filling out fields in an automated recruiting portal is not bad enough, many or most large employers have also adopted mechanical communication protocols that save live contact with a human being for the very end of the recruiting pipeline.

That is unacceptable, and I advise you to walk, run or roller skate away from any employer that requires to follow more and more steps (more tests, more requests for personal information and more delays) without adding human contact to the mix.

By the time you've devoted hours to applying for a job online, you deserve a human phone call or email exchange before you donate another minute or  brain cell to people who don't view your time as valuable.

The Decline in HR Staffing Levels

HR departments were much more generously staffed twenty years ago than they are now. These days two or three HR people might easily be expected to handle the employee relations, training, compensation and benefits and recruiting for several hundred team members. Paper-thin HR staffing is one reason why recruiting has degraded so badly.

How To Achieve Business' Holy Grail: Long-Term Profitable Growth

The Trump administration is preparing to submit its first budget this week, which is sure to call attention to plans for energizing the sluggish U.S. economy. Despite buoyant stock prices and a strengthening labor market, GDP growth sagged to 1.6% in 2016, its lowest non-recession level in 70 years. The U.S. has now gone more than a decade since last achieving the 3% growth rate that President Trump has promised his policies will deliver.

The elusive quest for higher GDP growth mirrors the challenge major corporations face as well. In perhaps the most extensive study of long-term growth rates, researchers at the Corporate Executive Board found that only 13% of Global 100 companies have been able to sustain as little as 2% real annual revenue growth from one decade to the next over the past 50 years. The consequences of stalled growth are serious. In the CEB study, the majority of companies that stalled, never were able to re-energize growth, often leading to bankruptcy or fire-sales at distressed prices.

But CEOs, like politicians, are an optimistic lot. Bain consultants James Allen and Chris Zook recently examined the annual reports of the Forbes Global 2000 and found that on average, CEOs projected that their company would grow at twice the rate and be four times more profitable than the industry average. In other words, as Allen waggishly notes, “the entire world of business is projecting to take share from the entire world of business.” But after examining the performance of the Global 2000 over the decade 2001–2011, Bain found that only about 10% of companies actually met their growth targets.

While large corporations have struggled with long-term growth, the performance of startup ventures has also been deteriorating. The rate of new business formation in the U.S. has been steadily declining for decades, as has their growth rate during the first five years.  These trends pose significant problems for the U.S. economy for two reasons.  First, startups have traditionally been a hotbed of innovation, growth and productivity.  And second, young businesses have historically accounted for nearly all net new jobs created in the U.S. Older, larger businesses, by comparison, have been shedding as many workers as they’ve added over the past three decades, and this trend is likely to worsen with acquisition-driven industry concentration increasing across most sectors of the economy.

So if the rate of new business formation and growth has been declining for years, and seven out of every eight large enterprises have been unable to sustain above-average long-term growth, it’s no wonder the U.S. has been experiencing a secular decline in GDP growth for the past five decades.

Why is business growth so hard to sustain? The Trump administration has argued that regulatory excess and high corporate and individual tax rates have sapped U.S. competitiveness in the global marketplace. Directionally, these arguments have merit. But the trends cited above span periods of higher and lower taxation and regulatory intensity, so at best, government policy doesn’t fully explain the causes of declining growth rates. Moreover, in the current political environment, legislative gridlock dampens the prospects for major policy reform.   So business leaders would be well advised to look within their own enterprises to assess what they can do to more effectively achieve the holy grail of business: long-term profitable growth.

Many observers have questioned whether long-term profitable growth is even a realistic goal for large corporations, given the challenges presented by three seemingly immutable forces in the marketplace:

• The law of large numbers, which posits the obvious mathematical reality that as a company grows, the incremental revenue required to maintain above-market growth becomes ever larger. For example, if Apple continued to grow in 2016 at the same compound annual growth rate as it had over the prior five years, it would have needed to add $68 billion in incremental revenue, i.e. more than adding the 2016 revenue of Pepsi, UPS, United Technologies or Disney! The fact that Apple’s revenues actually declined in 2016 – it’s first dip in 15 years – gave ammunition to naysayers who believe Apple’s prospects for further growth are dim.

•The law of competition, which states that companies achieving above-average returns on invested capital will inevitably revert to the industry mean because superior returns will continue to attract new entrants until profit premiums have been competed away. This certainly proved to be the case with Blackberry, whose return on assets in 2007 – the year Apple introduced the iPhone – was in excess of 30% (more than twice Apple’s ROA). Needless to say, Blackberry suffered a massive fall from grace as capable competitors attacked the lucrative smartphone market.

•The law of competitive advantage, which invokes the properties of product life cycles dictating that the sales and profit potential of all products tend to erode over time. For example, the early sales growth of GoPro’s popular line of action cameras exceeded 100% between 2011 and 2012, but steadily declined thereafter, turning negative in 2016 (-26.8%).

Proponents of these intrinsic limits to sustained growth believe that market leaders have inherent liabilities that make them vulnerable to brash upstarts. For example, in Gladwell’s revisionist view of the biblical tale of David and Goliath, dim-witted and ponderous Goliath was actually the underdog in his battle against fearless, agile, and resourceful David. But as applied to business, this viewpoint is not only flawed, but it could become a self-fulfilling prophecy of corporate failure. If management truly believes that long-term above-market profitable growth is impossible, a logical response would be to protect and harvest current assets and customers for as long as possible. But such an approach—playing not to lose instead of playing to win—only serves to hasten the decline of market leaders. The biblical Goliath may have been a ponderous oaf, but CEOs in large enterprises don’t have to be. As noted in the exhibit below, a number of business Goliaths have continued to prosper by maintaining the core values, entrepreneurial spirit and adaptability that led to their success in the first place.

How does this elite minority of superstars achieve long-term profitable growth? In my recently published book, I distill three common characteristics of growth-oriented companies:

• Continuous innovation—not for its own sake, but to deliver . . .

• Meaningful differentiation—recognized and valued by consumers, enabled by . . .

• Business alignment—where all corporate capabilities, resources, incentives, and business culture and processes are aligned to support continuous business renewal.

This simple prescription may seem common sensical and it is. But in practice, it is devilishly difficult for most companies to execute, for two reasons. First, it requires companies to simultaneously excel at both exploiting current assets and market positions while simultaneously exploring new, possibly disruptive new business opportunities. This management “ambidexterity” is actually quite difficult to master, because large corporations are heavily inclined and incentivized to protect their current core business. It is generally very hard to overcome a corporate fear of cannibalization or a sense of “if it’s not broken don’t fix it,” and “you can’t argue with success.”

The second (and related) impediment to long-term corporate growth is in capital allocation, which too often prioritizes short-term performance gains over long-term sustainable growth. This trend is manifested in two pervasive management practices that have unwittingly compromised long-term corporate and national growth, and tilted the scale towards corporate benefits at the expense of consumer and employee welfare:

• A binge in large M&A transactions, increasing industry consolidation across a wide range of industries. For example, The Economist reports that a $10 trillion acquisition spending spree since 2008 has contributed to increasing concentration in two-thirds of the US economy’s roughly 900 industries. Not surprisingly, the resulting decrease in competition has conveyed greater pricing power to many bulked-up incumbents, helping to drive up corporate profits but often at the expense of job growth and customer satisfaction.

• Unprecedented levels of corporate stock buybacks, often at the expense of value creating organic investments in long-term growth. Over the years 2006-2015, the 459 companies in the S& P 500 Index publicly listed over this period expended nearly $4 trillion on stock buybacks, representing 54% of net income, plus another 37% of net income on dividends, raising legitimate concerns as to whether too many large enterprises have been under-investing in innovation and corporate capabilities required to sustain long-term profitable growth.

In future posts, I will explore more fully the executive mindsets, behaviors and management imperatives to improve long-term, profitable growth. I’ll close here with on comment on the link between corporate behaviors and national economic growth, which has been hotly debated for years. New research, led by a team from the McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) found that companies that operate with a true long-term mindset have considerably outperformed their industry peers since 2001 across almost every important financial measure.

The MGI research team analyzed the operating metrics of 615 non-finance companies that reported continuous results from 2001 to 2015, and whose market capitalization exceeded $5 billion in at least one year.  To distinguish between companies that exhibited a short- and long-term management mindset, researchers analyzed five operational and business performance indicators.

• Investment. The ratio of capex to depreciation, indicating which companies invest more and more-consistently than other companies.

• Earnings quality. Accruals as a share of revenue, indicating which companies rely less on accounting decisions and more on underlying cash flow than other companies.

• Margin growth. Difference between earnings growth and revenue growth, assuming that long-term companies are less likely to grow their margins unsustainably in order to hit near-term targets.

• Earnings growth. Difference between earnings-per-share (EPS) growth and true earnings growth, highlighting actions such as share repurchases to boost short-term EPS

• Quarterly targeting. Incidence of beating or missing EPS targets by less than two cents, indicating long-term companies are more likely to miss earnings targets by small amounts when they easily could have taken action to hit them and less likely to hit earnings targets by small amounts where doing so would divert resources from other business needs.

The analysis concluded that 27% of the sample were managed for the long-term relative to their industry peers over the entire study horizon, or clearly became more long-term oriented between the first and second half of the study horizon.  The remaining 73% of companies exhibited evidence of short-term management priorities.  The preponderance of management short-termism reflects growing pressure executives feel to hit near-term targets.  A recent executive survey reported that 87% of executives and directors feel most pressured to demonstrate strong financial performance within two years or less, 65% say short-term pressure has increased over the past five years, and 55% of executives and directors in companies lacking a long-term culture say they would delay a new project to hit quarterly targets, even if it sacrificed long-term value.

But this bias for short-term results is misguided.  The difference in financial performance between companies managed for short- and long-term growth is striking.  Among the firms identified as focused on the long term, average revenue and earnings growth between 2001 and 2014 were 47% and 36% higher, and market capitalization grew 58% faster as well.

The returns to society and the overall economy were equally impressive. Companies that were managed for the long term added nearly 12,000 more jobs on average than their peers over the study horizon. MGI calculated that U.S. GDP over the past decade might well have grown by an additional $1 trillion if the whole economy had performed at the level the long-term stalwarts delivered — and would have generated more than five million additional jobs.

Nearly 65 years ago, GMs CEO Charlie Wilson stated “what was good for the country was good for General Motors and vice versa.”  But Wilson’s equivalence between corporate and national welfare is only true if executives effectively manage their enterprises with a long-term mindset committed to continuous innovation, meaningful product differentiation and a corporate culture that promotes corporate agility and market responsiveness.

Follow me @lenshermanCBS.  More ideas and contact info on book site: If You're In A Dogfight, Become A Cat! - Strategies For Long-Term Growth

What Corporate Execs May Be Missing That Business Founders Have In Abundance

Browning Associates Blog 

Lynda Shaw ,  

 CONTRIBUTOR

I write about trust, motivation, communication and decision-making.  

Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.

If you are a business founder of a private company, what advantage do you have over your cousin who is C-level for a public company?

You are probably thinking of a few things that you do better and a few things your cousin does better. But for the purposes of this discourse there is one difference that is worth thinking about, especially now with much uncertainty and so many surprises in our economic and political climate.

As a business founder you know your business, you know about the products, you know how they were created and are made and you relate to your employees and customers on their terms. Your C-level cousin is likely to be an excellent accountant, lawyer, marketing or sales professional, but they don’t always fully understand the products and services that are at the core of the business.

I am not trying to upset all your C-level cousins, but I am trying to point out that working in a ‘power tower’ without the human factor of rapport which comes from knowing what your company gizmos do, how they are made and what happens when the little darlings go wrong, is how you gain trust and loyalty.  Both are needed more than ever in a world of economic uncertainty.

You, as a business founder, do this by default and it encourages and persuades people to move away from the large public companies and move towards you and your fellow entrepreneurs.

There are examples of highly successful giants in industry being led by people who intimately understand the business they are in. For instance, Greg Foran, the president and CEO of Walmart US, has an employment history in the retail industry such as Woolworths and supermarkets; and the Chairman and CEO of General Motors, Mary T. Barra, has worked in engineering across various functions for years.

If you are  part of a valuable team of lawyers, accountants, engineers and other professionals on a C-level executive management board, I wonder if the next time you are hiring for a key role, it may be an economically sound idea if you choose someone who really deeply understands how your particular specialist market, products and services tick, so that you can enjoy some of the advantages business founders have?

Browning Associates -  thanks the author of this article

Find A Better Career Now.. What Are You Waiting For?

Find A Better Career Now.. What Are You Waiting For?

By John Seraichyk - Browning Associates

Where Do You Want To Be And When Do You Want To Be There?

If You Wait For Perfect Conditions, You Will Never Get Anything Done. ECCLESIASTES 11.4

Whether employed, underemployed or unemployed, the longer you wait to engage a professional non-traditional search endeavor, the more leverage you will lose with regard to where you work geographically, who you work for, and what you earn.

As expert executive career search and employment consultants, our most monumental obstacle and frustration is the ominous actuality that most executive job seekers or career changers do not contact us until they are 2-6 months or more in to their job search or are currently well employed, but for more reasons than we can explain here, they drudge onward! The later phenomenon can carry on for years; leading to stagnation, frustration, lost wages et cetera.

For those employed, many have been thinking about a change or know there is about to be a reduction in work force, but they wait months or even years to take action! This always makes our work more difficult.

For those who are unemployed

Most have forwarded dozens of credential submissions, posted their résumés on Internet web sites, job boards et cetera. Again, we have to work longer and harder.

Whether Employed or Unemployed, waiting to an implement an aggressive professional search transition for any reason, is always a costly mistake! Here are just a few of the potential problems you will be faced with when you don’t take immediate action:

Once you close a door by either sending the wrong resume to the wrong person or vice versa, it makes it that much more difficult or impossible for us to re-open that door.

Once you plaster the Internet with your resume, you have most-likely discredited your brand, oversold yourself to recruiters and furthered potential personal frustration with the entire search process.

Conducting a self-directed traditional executive search via corporate instilled protocols and bureaucracy mazes will always stall your professional mission!

If you are marketing yourself using self-directed traditional job search strategies, chances are you are penetrating less than 30% of your potential market, and like so many others, you will be forced to settle! Thus, thwarting your ability to join the right company, in the right geography for maximum compensation. The dreaded unemployment-gap continues to lengthen.

Many employed executives are afraid to move! Even in the direct line of ongoing RIF’s (Reduction in Work Force), many hang on until it’s too late. Others may have reached the proverbial glass ceiling and are afraid to move due to economic conditions or other improbable uncertainties. This may go on for years. It is much easier to transition at 45 than it is at 55 and so on at 55 than it is at 60 years of age. We see this all the time! Furthermore, although many will never do anything except continue to internally strategize a move. While others may write a resume, send it out, receive little or no responses and be thankful that they have the job they’ve got! When in reality, sending out a few resumes in to the abyss is about as effective as playing the lottery.

If you are ready to take control of your professional mission and career satisfaction, Contact Us Today!

Most Sincerely,Browning Associates http://www.blogger.com/

Job Hunting? Dont Take Maybe for an Answer

 

Job Hunting?

Don’t Take Maybe for an Answer
I am incessantly astounded by the number of execs I speak with that will take the time to painstakingly develop a stellar résumé, submit it to the company of their dreams and rather than initiating an aggressive follow up call; they are typically insulted when nobody calls them back!

Your job search cannot endure without a daily measure of NO’s

If you are presently unemployed and your earning potential is $200k annually; it is costing you $769.00 in lost wages per work-day to conduct your search….Therefore, if you scrutinize your job search strictly from a business perspective, each day of unemployment is sinking your biz to the tune of $4,000.00 per week or $16,000.00 per month!

GOT NO’s?

The length of your job search is not determined by market conditions, salary requirements, geography preferences or restrictions and/or by your specific skill set! No; the time it takes to generate the perfect job offer is only determined by the number of “NO’s” you receive per day.

Before you proceed to understand what qualifies as a NO, let’s look at what a “NO” is not.

These MAYBES don’t count!

You apply to a company, receive a polite form letter or email saying “thanks we’ll let ya know!” They are saying “know”, not No!

You honor your follow up commitment as stated in your introductory letter by means of actually mustering the audacity to place a follow up call (a damn follow up email doesn’t count)…The admin says your contact is too busy right now; you plan on calling back and you usually don’t! This is another one for the maybe file! Remedy: Place 3-5 more follow up calls, ask for a YES or a NO and call me in the morning!

You submit the perfect resume for the perfect job which you are perfectly qualified for and to your absolute amazement; they don’t call you back... You scratch your head, let go of another precious hunk of your all so necessary self-confidence and return to the black hole (Web) in search of another place that will tell you MAYBE! And so on and so forth…

You amass the bravery to call an old friend presently employed at XYZ Company. He doesn’t call you back, or worse, he sees you at your kid’s soccer game and ducks into a nearby alleyway... If your dim voicemail said you were looking for a job and he doesn’t have one, he’ll hide because he has no job for you today…..Asking for industry advice or to converse with another thought leader on your level as a means of simple networking is the key; asking for a job is a one way ticket to the HR MAYBE machine…

You attend an amazing 5 hour interview with the company of your dreams. HR calls the next day and says “we will be in touch before next Friday.” Next Friday comes and goes and they don’t call… You assume the worst, wait two weeks and place a halfhearted call to HR leaving a halfhearted jail mail (voicemail)….Or worse, because you think you have this one in the bag, you do nothing and nothing happens and it was all for nothing and you are now another 4 weeks ( $16,000.00) deeper in lost wages!

The recruiter is frothing at the mouth on Monday and by Tuesday the FBI couldn’t find him;
you go away peacefully!

You sent your resume, you have left 5 VM’s and your call has not been returned… you go away peacefully!

Now, go back and make a list of all the companies that have shunned you with a big fat Maybe. smile, dial, and move those MAYBES to your NO file. The sooner you do, the sooner you will find the ever illusive YES!

Here is what you job search needs to look like:

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO YES

(notice you don’t see the word MAYBE anywhere?)

3 Reasons Why Your Network Contact is Not Calling You Back!

3 Reasons Why Your Network Contact is Not Calling You Back!

You're speaking with another executive in your network or recruiter whom has promised to circulate your resume throughout his network. He even goes as far as to say he knows of a vacant position that you would be perfect for...He promises to touch base with his contacts and be back with you in short order! Two weeks have since passed, and your ol friend has vanished! You've left a few messages, but  at this point you might be wondering if he's still breathing. Just a week ago he was fervently excited to help, and now; MIA! How could this be?????

Here's What Went Wrong

   

Mistake Number 1. No Quid Pro Quo!

You did not take the time to understand what his needs are...Did you ask him how things are going in his career? Has he thought about something bigger and better for himself? Did you suggest a few people that you might refer him to? If you are part of The Browning Associates network, you could have said, "I know of a huge network in your industry and I'm glad to connect you with some excellent high level contacts...Either way, if you spoke for 10 minutes, 8 of those minutes should have been about your network contacts and what you can do to help him...Every 200k executive on the planet is always looking for something bigger; make it about them; no excuses, no exceptions! You will use your remaining 2 minutes to ask that they do the same for you...Consequently, the (Quid pro quo) has been birthed in to action!

Mistake Number 2. No Accountability No Call to Action!

Before you finish your conversation, there are two things that must happen. 1. Make it very clear what you are going to do for your networking contact and 2. Schedule a time for follow up. As far as they can see, you are scheduling a follow up call so as to be sure you are able to come back to them with the promised referrals etc... Remember; never give them all you've got until they come forth with their promise as well...Always keep them wanting more!

Mistake Number 3. You appear Needy or as if you're selling something!

Remember who you are! You are a solution provider! If people do not see value in connecting with you or clearly are not respecting your time, move on! Of course we always remain professionally aggressive, but we never come across as if we are needy or selling... When I speak with somebody in our network on your behalf, I say it like this: "My guy/gal is a busy senior executive...Upon my review of your resume and background, it would be in your best interest to get to know this lady/gent asap...H/she will land a new role soon, at which point the window of opportunity to get to Him/er will slam shut! Your call...Let me know... Just like that; no more no less...You should promote yourself exactly the same way...People want what they cant have...

"We look forward to assisting you with reaching all of your career goals! "